And moving further on, Example 3 starts talking about "warnings", and follows up with "strict_off". This confused me, as I tried to associate their meaning with what I know about Perl's own warning and strict pragma's:
* warnings are shown, but processing attempts to continue. * when strict is on, really naughty errors stop processing. The behavior of MARC::Record seems different, as warnings stops processing of an entire file, not just the record within the file that had problems. Using the distributed 't/camel.usmarc', I introduced a critical error by replacing the first "10" tag with "a0", an obvious problem. What I expected was a warning to be shown, that specific record ignored, and continued processing of all the other records within the MARC file, which would place it more in line with what Perl's "use warnings" attempts: continue on at all costs. Instead, that single warning in the first MARC record (of ten or so) stops processing for the entire file, not just that record: Invalid indicators "a0" forced to blanks in record 1 for tag 245 and nothing else was printed. I expected titles for the other 9 or so. This "stop at first warning" also seems to defeat the purpose of returning an array of @warnings, since @warnings will always be one: the first warning that stopped processing of the file. Granted, the array becomes important when strict is turned off and warnings are aggregated over time. Nutshell: the implied "strict" doesn't make a "warning" a warning: it makes it an error that stops the entire batch, not just the record. -- Morbus Iff ( rotinom ruoy edisni deppart mi pleH ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus
